Andy Burnham blocked from re-entering parliament.

All I can say, big, stupid mistake, in my opinion

Hardly democratic

I really like this quote from Chris Mason, political editor, on the BBC website.

‘In an exercise of brute power, which is simultaneously an illustration of how they perceive their own weakness, Number Ten has scuppered…’ etc.
👏👏 Spot on!

I like Andy Burnham and think he would be a good PM, just not right now when Kier Starmer is at least keeping the orange one over the pond in his sights.

However, the Board of Peace business has raised a small alarm bell in my head. Tony Blair was a popular candidate for PM, and led the party with charisma. He has subsequently shown a deplorable lack of morality. I would just hate it if Andy Burnham also has feet of clay when his day in the sun comes.

I asked Chatgtp about Burnham, regional power and PR. It gave me a selection of recent articles from reputable and easily verifiable sources.

Devolution & regional power

He continues to campaign for deeper devolution beyond the current metro-mayoral model, arguing that local areas must have real power rather than being subject to Whitehall control.

His framing of “rewiring Westminster” centres on empowering regions and redistributing power away from London-centric structures.

Proportional Representation

Although not always front-and-centre in mainstream news articles from the last few months, Burnham has repeatedly argued for a system that better reflects voters’ choices and regional voices — critiquing first-past-the-post and connecting that critique to the broader need for democratic reform

Past comments (e.g., at policy gatherings) have explicitly connected proportional representation with empowering regions and fixing democratic deficits.

Labour Link was one source cited. I've linked to this article as being representative of Chatgtp's conclusions and because it doesn't have a paywall

labourlist.org/2026/01/burnhams-britain-king-of-the-north-rewire-westminster/

I found his views on German federalism interesting. But as a man of left I wonder why he hasn't had the same look at the municipality system in the Nordic counties. Both give us models of how we could equalise our Combined Authorities. It seems he has only looked at one model - the one that would give the Mayor greater power.

As I understand it - and that understanding isn't great - although the Nordic systems differ they do provide greater municipal equalisation; citizens have access tocomparable public services

• Regardless of where they live
• Even if local tax bases differ greatly

I have a feeling AB is more interested in power than basic equality.

MayBee70

I really don’t understand why, when the world is in such an unstable state and it’s almost impossible to believe what’s happening in America that there are people in the Labour Party that are desperate for a leadership election. It’s no wonder that Labour are very rarely in power.

I'm inclined to agree.

We need some stability at the present time. Starmer seems to have got the measure of Trump and seems able to deal with him diplomatically but firmly (imo).

LemonJam

Casdon "He is still up there in the Best Prime Minister for the UK polls carried out by YouGov every month, so yes, there are many people who still think so, I think it’s his performance on the international relations side that is protecting his popularity".

Sundowngirl- "I’m a little confused Casdon. The YouGov poll that I saw for end of December showed only 15% thought Keir Starmer was doing well as PM and 73% said he was doing badly.
Have you seen a different poll?"

LizzieDrip Sun 25-Jan-26 23:53:42 to sundowngirl

"www.ipsos.com/en-uk/britons-narrowly-split-between-labour-led-keir-starmer-and-reform-uk-led-nigel-farage-poll-reveals".

Starmer is by no measure a "Best prime Minster". The poll link solely shows there was a very narrow split, a particular moment in time, as to which of the current party leaders the public thought was best to be PM. It did not measure whether Starmer is a good PM. Many would agree that many are disillusioned with the calibre of some of the current party leaders.

The only important measure is who the public would like to see as Labour leader at the next election to secure a second term.

I don’t agree LemonJam. This is a monthly poll, not a one off. It measures which of the party leaders the electorate believe offers the most as PM. That will influence their voting in the next general election. It is one of a range of factors, obviously, but to dismiss it is incorrect.

Fallingstar

It is not in Starmer’s interest because Burnham is a popular grass roots Labour politician whose values strike a chord with those now feeling disaffected by the Labour party.

This, absolutely.
Citing the cost of a mayoral election is IMO a pretty feeble excuse.
TBH it’ll serve them right if Reform win the by-election. Not that I’ll be happy about it, needless to say. 🙁

I still like Starmer but it is Rachel Reeves who is not up to the job. Her decisions have been so unbelievably wrong from the very beginning. Starmer cannot change her as it would undermine his position.

Starmer wants to cling on and he will do anything to stay in power. This man was a perceived threat.

Allira

Whitewavemark2

Burnham was never leadership material. That is why he has been rejected. I think mayor is a suitable level.

Better than others who have become PM, though, wouldn't you say?

That is why he has been rejected.

To clarify: he was blocked from standing for by-election. This was not a leadership contest.
What are they frightened of?

Casdon "He is still up there in the Best Prime Minister for the UK polls carried out by YouGov every month, so yes, there are many people who still think so, I think it’s his performance on the international relations side that is protecting his popularity".

Sundowngirl- "I’m a little confused Casdon. The YouGov poll that I saw for end of December showed only 15% thought Keir Starmer was doing well as PM and 73% said he was doing badly.
Have you seen a different poll?"

LizzieDrip Sun 25-Jan-26 23:53:42 to sundowngirl

"www.ipsos.com/en-uk/britons-narrowly-split-between-labour-led-keir-starmer-and-reform-uk-led-nigel-farage-poll-reveals".

Starmer is by no measure a "Best prime Minster". The poll link solely shows there was a very narrow split, a particular moment in time, as to which of the current party leaders the public thought was best to be PM. It did not measure whether Starmer is a good PM. Many would agree that many are disillusioned with the calibre of some of the current party leaders.

The only important measure is who the public would like to see as Labour leader at the next election to secure a second term.

Whitewavemark2

Burnham was never leadership material. That is why he has been rejected. I think mayor is a suitable level.

Better than others who have become PM, though, wouldn't you say?

The temptation for Reform will be to field a big name in the by election. Depending on who it is, that could go well for them, or backfire badly.

WWM2- I do not share your view. Burnham is popular and has done great things for Manchester, including securing growth and investment. He has won the Greater Manchester mayoral election successfully three times- clearly keeping his electorate on board. Starmer has yet to show he is capable of winning a second election as PM in comparison and the polls show he is not keeping his electorate on side. B has many more years of political experience compared to Starmer- and is a much better communicator. He invests a lot of time and energy in speaking to local press and getting his message out- something Starmer is not good at.

The NEC decision to bar Burnham may well pave the way for Reform to win the Gorton and Denton by-election however instead of allowing Burnham to stand. Plus it's not a great message for Starmer to send that the local residents have no say in the decision whether Burnham could stand and that he and the NEC alone makes the decision. Reform and the Green parties will fight tooth and nail to win the by election and capitalise on any success. Who will Labour field, what will the local electorate think of Labour's decision to ban Burnham and how will that impact on their by-election vote- another risk for Starmer.

The argument put forward by the NEC that a Greater Manchester Mayor election may be at risk if Burnham leaves is also a message of weakness in my view. It's been held by Labour with a 63% share of the vote. Thus Labour's message is that it is running scared of loosing to another party- a sign of weakness rather than confidence.

Starmer is also sending the message he is scared of those around him vying for future leadership position. A strong confident leader should have the skills to manage this. He still has to manage Wes Streeting's naked ambitions- it's part and parcel of the PM role to manage such factions and conflict. I am no fan of Trump in any form but he has a large pack around him of those ambitious to succeed him- this is normal. Meanwhile he manages their ambitions, clearly demanding compliance and sign up to his cause to keep them on board and in the race.

The newspapers without exception all have this conflict playing out on the front pages this morning. Labour MPs giving their differing and varying views, including those openly saying it was the wrong decision. It remains to be seen how long this will play out and how damaging it may be.

Slightly harsh Whitewavemark2, because he does have a big job which he does well now. I think he suits being a big fish in a small pond, so mayor is the right level for him to be.

Burnham was never leadership material. That is why he has been rejected. I think mayor is a suitable level.

Burnham has done nothing but snipe at Starmer from the sidelines ever since Labour won the election. Probably fuelling a lot of the dissatisfaction with his leadership.There is no way that he would be trying to become an MP again if he didn’t think he would finally be in with a chance to become party leader ( and PM, after it was Starmer who did all the hard work getting the party into power). I read the thread on mumsnet and the people on there seem to see him for what he is. It’s easy to be critical when you’re not in a position of power. Look at how the LibDems were always the party of reason until they were in the coalition ( I still love the LibDems by the way, always have). I’m not happy with some of the things that Labour have done/are doing, but I’m not going to do things that will pave the way for a Reform government.

LizzieDrip

MayBee70

I really don’t understand why, when the world is in such an unstable state and it’s almost impossible to believe what’s happening in America that there are people in the Labour Party that are desperate for a leadership election. It’s no wonder that Labour are very rarely in power.

Agreed MayBee!

I’m furious with them.

Agree with both. I'm surprised so many Labour MPs think they can have the luxury of intrigue and gossip when so much basic work needs to be done.

Despite Starmer’s clear weaknesses in domestic issues I think he understands that probably better than anybody else does, DaisyAnneReturns.
At present managing our international relationships is the most important role for the PM, to do the very best not to represent us and our allies, and not get embroiled in conflict, or in trade wars.
I’m annoyed with Burnham too for stirring the pot now, as I can’t see that the UK has anybody else who could do a better job internationally than Starmer is currently doing. Of course we are all praying it will settle down, and then is the point to seek change in the party leadership, not now.

LizzieDrip

MayBee70

I really don’t understand why, when the world is in such an unstable state and it’s almost impossible to believe what’s happening in America that there are people in the Labour Party that are desperate for a leadership election. It’s no wonder that Labour are very rarely in power.

Agreed MayBee!

I’m furious with them.

I have never understood why Labour always plays its party schisms out in public. Will they never learn that that is what looses them votes, not the opposition suddenly appealing to voters.

You are right MayBee. If ever there was a time to put the country first this is it - not behaving like squabbling children!

Burnham has gone down in my estimation, the Labour party.needs team players and he's playing into the hands of those who want to tear the party apart ( yet again!). Have they learned nothing by watching the conservative party destroy itself? The country is facing difficult challenges and we need politicians who are focused on the job, not on trying to keep their job. This is another complete distraction. Burnham has an important job to do which he actively sought fgs Andy, shut up, show some loyalty and do a good job for the people who elected you as Mayor!

P.S. £4.7 million paid by the public via the council!

vegansrock

A mayoral election costs over £3m - would this be a good use of public money?

Estimated cost, based on the last one two years ago, is £4.7 million.